SPH Digital Inc. v. Tao Consulting LLC et al
| SPH Digital Inc. |
| Sean Tao, Tao Consulting LLC and Chung S Tao |
| 3:2024cv00861 |
| February 13, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Laurel Beeler |
| Charles R Breyer |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 29, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Summons, Complaint & Other Required Documents (including Plaintiff's Certificate of Conflicts and Interested Entities or Persons, Consent or Declination to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction, Order Reassigning Case, Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording, General Standing Order for Civil & Criminal Cases (Breyer), Standing Order for All Judges of N.D. Cal, and Plaintiff's Declination of Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction) served on Sean Tao a.k.a. Chung S. Tao (via attorney M. Danton Richardson) on 3/11/2024, filed by SPH Digital Inc.. (Rainforth, Natalie) (Filed on 3/29/2024) |
| Filing 14 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Summons, Complaint & Other Required Documents (including Plaintiff's Certificate of Conflicts and Interested Entities or Persons, Consent or Declination to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction, Order Reassigning Case, Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording, General Standing Order for Civil & Criminal Cases (Breyer), Standing Order for All Judges of N.D. Cal, and Plaintiff's Declination of Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction) served on Tao Consulting LLC (via attorney M. Danton Richardson) on 3/11/2024, filed by SPH Digital Inc.. (Rainforth, Natalie) (Filed on 3/29/2024) |
| Filing 13 Certificate of Interested Entities by Sean Tao, Tao Consulting LLC (Richardson, M.) (Filed on 3/26/2024) |
| Filing 12 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand , COUNTERCLAIM against All Defendants by Sean Tao, Tao Consulting LLC. (Richardson, M.) (Filed on 3/26/2024) |
| Filing 11 CLERK'S NOTICE: A Joint Case Management Statement due by 5/17/2024. Initial Case Management Conference set for 5/24/2024 at 8:30 AM in San Francisco - To be determined. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/15/2024) |
| Filing 10 Summons Issued as to Sean Tao, Tao Consulting LLC. (Attachments: #1 Summons)(jml, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/15/2024) |
Filing 9
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Charles R. Breyer for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler no longer assigned to case, Notice: The assigned judge participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order No. 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. Signed by Clerk on 02/15/2024. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(mbc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/15/2024)
|
| Filing 8 CLERK'S NOTICE OF IMPENDING REASSIGNMENT TO A U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: The Clerk of this Court will now randomly reassign this case to a District Judge because either (1) a party has not consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge, or (2) time is of the essence in deciding a pending judicial action for which the necessary consents to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction have not been secured. You will be informed by separate notice of the district judge to whom this case is reassigned. ALL HEARING DATES PRESENTLY SCHEDULED BEFORE THE CURRENT MAGISTRATE JUDGE ARE VACATED AND SHOULD BE RE-NOTICED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE JUDGE TO WHOM THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED. This is a text only docket entry; there is no document associated with this notice. (ejk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/14/2024) |
| Filing 7 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by SPH Digital Inc... (Rainforth, Natalie) (Filed on 2/14/2024) |
| Filing 6 Proposed Summons. (Rainforth, Natalie) (Filed on 2/14/2024) |
| Filing 5 Proposed Summons. (Rainforth, Natalie) (Filed on 2/14/2024) |
| Filing 4 Certificate of Interested Entities by SPH Digital Inc. identifying Corporate Parent Ordissimo S.A. for SPH Digital Inc.. Submitted Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 and Local Civ. R. 3-15 (Rainforth, Natalie) (Filed on 2/14/2024) |
| Filing 3 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 5/9/2024. Initial Case Management Conference set for 5/16/2024 11:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom B, 15th Floor. (jml, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/14/2024) |
| Filing 2 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 2/27/2024. (wsm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/13/2024) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Sean Tao, Tao Consulting LLC with jury demand (NO PROCESS) ( Filing fee $ 405, receipt number ACANDC-19121601.). Filed by SPH Digital Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Rainforth, Natalie) (Filed on 2/13/2024) Modified on 2/14/2024 (jml, COURT STAFF). |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
